Which ions exhibit greater stability: N vs O, P vs N, or S vs N?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the stability of various ions, specifically comparing the stability of ions involving nitrogen (N), oxygen (O), phosphorus (P), and sulfur (S). Participants explore theoretical aspects, resonance structures, and the effects of charge distribution and bonding on ion stability.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that the positive charge in certain ions is due to bonding rather than a deficiency of electrons.
  • It is proposed that one ion can obtain a lone pair from nitrogen, potentially affecting stability.
  • There is a claim that nitrogen can donate its lone pair more easily than oxygen, which may influence ion stability.
  • Oxygen's ability to affect negative charge density through inductive effects is noted as a factor in stability comparisons.
  • Some participants argue that phosphorus can better accommodate a positive charge compared to nitrogen.
  • Backbonding is mentioned as a possible stabilizing factor in certain cases.
  • One participant expresses doubt about their previous conclusions, suggesting that the second ion may actually be more stable.
  • Delocalization of charge is emphasized as a key factor in stability, with references to resonance structures.
  • Another participant notes that sulfur can also engage in backbonding, which may enhance stability.
  • Electromeric effects are discussed as potentially more effective than inductive effects in influencing electron density.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on which ions exhibit greater stability, as multiple competing views and uncertainties remain regarding the stability of the ions discussed.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference resonance structures and charge delocalization without fully resolving the implications of these factors on stability. There are also mentions of potential errors in reasoning and the need for further exploration of the discussed ions.

AGNuke
Gold Member
Messages
455
Reaction score
9
We have to determine in which of the following options, the first ion is more stable than the second.

1.
Q1.png


2.
Q2.png


3.
Q3.png


4.
Q4.png


5.
Q5.png


6.
Q6.png


Attempt at the question

1. Since in the first one, +ve charge is due to bonding, not deficiency of electrons.

2. First one can get lone pair from N.

3. N can easily donate its lone pair as opposed to O.

4. O can easily affect the -ve charge density by inductive effect.

5. P can handle +ve on itself more appreciably than N.

6. Backbonding is possible in 2nd case.

The problem is that I have marked 4 options but only 3 options are right as per the answer key. Is it that the answer key is wrong?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Changed Image Host. Now should be able to see the pics.
 
AGNuke said:
We have to determine in which of the following options, the first ion is more stable than the second.

1.
Q1.png


2.
Q2.png


3.
Q3.png


4.
Q4.png


5.
Q5.png


6.
Q6.png


Attempt at the question

1. Since in the first one, +ve charge is due to bonding, not deficiency of electrons.
Draw all of the resonance structures for the second choice and see if your reasoning holds up.

2. First one can get lone pair from N.

So can the second one. Which one is most stable?

3. N can easily donate its lone pair as opposed to O.

4. O can easily affect the -ve charge density by inductive effect.

5. P can handle +ve on itself more appreciably than N.
Is that a methyl group instead of double bonded methylene on the nitrogen? If not, it looks like an ylide but you haven't drawn the carbanion. Right answer, BTW.
 
1.
A1.png


I've blundered up big time. I now think the second one is more stable. :cry:

2.
A2.png


Second one can also donate. (What's happened to me? :confused:).
 
Keep working on that delocalization for 1 and 2. You haven't show them all yet. Good work so far! Remember, the more delocalized the charge the more stable.
 
chemisttree said:
Is that a methyl group instead of double bonded methylene on the nitrogen? If not, it looks like an ylide but you haven't drawn the carbanion.

My Bad. Its carbanion. So, its possible that P can form pπ-dπ back bond.

As for 1 and 2, the latter case seems to have 3 canonical structures, which should increase their stability. Therefore, 1 and 2 are out of answer.

I noticed that the season of back bonding is showering over 4. S can also form pπ-dπ back bond to accommodate that -ve charge. And they say Electromeric effect is more effective in shifting electron density than Inductive effect.

So, the answer boils down to 3,4,5. I really need to take sleeping pills... :bugeye:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
6K
Replies
1
Views
11K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
10K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
29K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
6K
Replies
2
Views
3K